ArticleHospital pediatrics2024
Testing and Treatment Thresholds for Pediatric Pneumonia in the Emergency Department.
Article in Hospital pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical prediction models for pediatric community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) may standardize management. Understanding physician risk thresholds is important for model implementation. We aimed to elucidate physician-derived thresholds for chest radiograph performance and empirical antibiotic treatment of CAP among children presenting to the emergency department with respiratory illness before and after knowledge of results of a validated clinical prediction model.
methodsPediatric emergency physicians were surveyed through the American Academy of Pediatrics Pediatric Emergency Medicine Collaborative Research Committee and provided 8 clinical vignettes for children with respiratory symptoms. Respondents were asked to indicate their probability of radiographic CAP and choose whether they would obtain a chest radiograph or give empirical antibiotics before and after being provided with the probability of radiographic CAP based on a validated prediction model. We used logistic regression to establish testing and treatment thresholds, defined as the disease probability at which half of physicians acted.
resultsTwo-hundred and eight (44.3%) of 469 physicians completed the survey. Most were attending physicians (96.0%) practicing in a freestanding children's hospital (76.8%). Testing and treatment thresholds for CAP were 17.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 16.4% to 18.8%) and 66.1% (95% CI 60.1% to 72.5%), respectively, before knowledge of the model-estimated probability. With knowledge of the prediction model, testing and treatment thresholds were 13.5% (95% CI 12.3% to 14.7%) and 58.0% (95% CI 53.2-62.8).
conclusionsWe elucidated physician thresholds for testing and treatment of CAP, which may be integrated into future pneumonia risk models to improve acceptability and incorporation into practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.